Using Pro Combat for Good, Not Evil -- Part I.v

By Phil Hecken, on January 9th, 2011

By Phil Hecken

Last week, I introduced you to the full NFC version of how the NFL could adopt Nike’s toy pro combat uniforms when they take over the uniform contract for the 2012 season. Using a mix of current and retro-inspired uniforms, today I will present the first half of the AFC. I had hoped to have the entire set finished, but each mock can take two to three hours, and sometimes there just aren’t enough hours in the week. When I finish, I’ll post full writeups to each uniform, but here’s the quick and dirty.

So without further ado, running in alpha-order, the first eight:

~~~

Baltimore Ravens:Home, Road 1 & Road 2. Right out of the box I put one team in monochrome, a look with which I am not fond, but it just fits the Ravens. I kept the basics of their current uni, but fixed the helmet striping (and added gold). Also put stripes on the pants, which improves the uniform immensely. Road can have black or white pants.

Buffalo Bills:Home & Road. Not surprisingly, I gave the team with the worst uniform in the NFL a makeover, mostly using the throwbacks they break out twice a season as my model. I kept the charging buffalo for the helmet, but made put it on a white lid, just to keep the one good looking element from the current uni.

Cincinnati Bengals:Home 1, Home 2 & Road. I struggled with this one, and in the end, opted for a bit of a hybrid from their 2nd and 3rd gen unis. Orange over white or black is their best home look (after all, tigers are more orange than black), and I ditched all the stupid side striping. The shoulder loops and pant stripes are reminiscent of the unis introduced in 1982, as are the fonts.

Cleveland Browns:Home & Road. The Browns have pretty much one of the most classic unis in the game, so pro combat, with the ability to put proper striping on the comp sleeves, makes it even better. ‘Nuff said.

Denver Broncos:Home, Road 1 & Road 2. Although I was tempted to completely scrap the current (and really dated now) uni, I kept its best parts: the helmet logo and the fonts (you can argue about those being “best,” but it’s relatively speaking here) and dumped the “swoosh” paneling. Gave them the orange home jersey they belong in and fixed the helmet striping, and added proper pants stripes too. Hey, they won two Super Bowls in the current unis, so I couldn’t dump all ties to that past. The “alt” orange pants are a tip of the cap to Mothersunbowlker.

Houston Texans:Home & Road. The Texans have problems deciding if they’re a red or a blue team, so I solved that problem by putting them in equal amounts of both. I didn’t think I’d like the blue top over red pants, but I actually love it, and it’s a look they could totally own.

Indianapolis Colts:Home & Road. Like the Browns, the Colts have one of the most iconic looks in football, so my changes (which I’m sure die hards will oppose) are slight. I’m not sure if Nike can make the shoulder loops I’m proposing, but damn they look good. I also ever-so-slightly lightened the color of the blue. See if you can spot the other change.

Jacksonville Jaguars:Home & Road. Their current unis are horrid, so pro combat offers the opportunity to correct this. At first, I was reticent to put them in black pants, but I think it actually works, since they have a black helmet (which I made flat instead of the current “two tone” thing they have going on — I like it in concept, but it’s impossible to convey on the Interwebs, so I changed it up). Also put some nice gold and teal stripes on the helmet and pants, and stuck the jaguar logo on the comp sleeves for a bit of extra color.

~~~

OK. That’s the first half of the AFC. I’ve actually completed full sets for the Chiefs, Dolphins and Patriots, but the rest will have to wait until next weekend. Thanks for indulging me. Now, fire away.

~~~~~~~~~~

5 & 1, FCS Edition

Just when you thought we’d escape without a 5 & 1, along comes Mothersunbowlker to rank the Division II (or is it III) teams. As always, I’ve yet to see his list, but since I didn’t see any of the games, I have no idea whether or not whether he “got it.” But, if prior performance is any indication…he didn’t. Let’s see how he did:

OK then. There you go. Looking forward to part two of your Bowl 5 & 1 — I know that no matter how great Auburn and Oregon look, there’s no chance in hell they’ll be in the top 5. And that’s just wrong. But there have been a bunch of great matchups so far, so maybe it won’t be worthy and I won’t be as upset.

~~~~~~~~~~

Uni Tweaks

Lots and lots of tweaks keep pouring in, so obviously this is a popular feature. A bunch new to get to today. If you have a tweak, change or concept for any sport, send them my way.

Remember, if possible, try to keep your descriptions to ~50 words (give or take) per tweak. You guys have been great a keeping to that, and it’s much appreciated!

Got a big set of tweaks today…so lets get right into it.

Now, on to today’s tweaks:

~~~

Starting off the show is Greg (that’s all he used to ID himself), who has a tweak for New England:

Next up is UW favorite Bowen Hobbs, who has several great baseball concepts:

Hi Phil,

Here are a few concepts from the MLB series I did a while back.

Now, a lot of people think the Yankees uniforms are iconic and untouchable, and for the most part the home uniforms are. But the roads have had a few different iterations over the years, most recently with 70s style trim on the sleeves. My concept adds ideas for a few alternates, including a throwback style that I don’t think Yankees fans would hate.

For the Red Sox, I set out to change the two things that most bother me about their set: the utter lack of red on the road uniforms and the backwards facing sleeve patch. It looks like two little feet running away. I also changed the white to cream and used a older version of their Tuscan font.

While the White Sox have finally found an identity, I still saw room for improvement. I brought back the Big S logo and the winged sock. The uniforms feature subtle pinstripes for a Capone feel. The Sunday Alternate is all-black with a white cap.

Last up, we have the Indians. My goal for the Tribe was to remove Wahoo and bring some dignity to the design. I developed a dreamcatcher logo and changed the color scheme to brown and red so they would actually look unique in the sea of navy and red that is MLB.

And closing down the show today is Rocky Canonica, who has a Ravens concept:

I was wondering if any nfl team could pull off an ALL black and white uniform (with no gray) and I absolutely despise the Ravens uniforms. Purple does not belong in a football uniform especially when black is the other primary color. I thought if any team could pull of the look it might be them. I have also included a logo, two new helmets and wordmark.

Rocky

~~~

That’s all for today. Back next week with more.

~~~~~~~~~~

Playoffs?

Yesterday saw the upset-minded Seahawks in their suicide blue monochromes (and one of the greatest runs in the history of ever by Marshawn Lynch), with a little help from their 12th man, soundly defeat the Saints, who inexplicably chose to go with their black tights look. In a horrible looking (but great) game, I think I almost retroactively have to give the “better” looking moniker to the Seabirds, but I didn’t pick them, and I can’t switch it up now. Record 0-1.

In the nightcap, both teams looked great, but the New York Jets looked and played ever so slightly better than the Indianapolis Peytons. I’d have covered even if the Colts won, but the better uni didn’t need the points. Another awesome game and a great way to kick off the playoffs. (Record: 1-1)

And now, on to today’s games:

Baltimore Ravens (-3) at Kansas City Chiefs (over/under 40.5): The Ravens are another road favorite this weekend (the Saints being the other) having just missed out on claiming the AFC North title to the Stillers. They’re kind of schitzophrenic (as is their wont), so you never know which team is going to show up. The Chiefs, on the other hand, are relative newcomers to this playoffs thing, but they have had a solid season after a tremendous start, and hope to ride their AFC West title to a home victory.

In the uniform department, this one is no contest. The Chiefs uniform is one of the few staid, classics in the NFL, having remained almost untouched since the Chiefs moved from Dallas when Ricko was knee-high to a grasshopper. The Ravens have two possibilities — one good the other…not so good. Lately, they’ve been wearing their black pants, with black undersocks, which are stripeless. This gives them, like the Saints yesterday, that ballet dancer look. Their second option will be to wear white pants, which they haven’t worn since October. Those look much better.

There is no question as to what the Chiefs will wear. That would be red over white. So nice. There hasn’t been a playoff game in Arrowhead in quite some time, and I always love seeing the sea of red there. Should be loud, and quite a scene.

Gotta take the points and the home dog here, and that means the better dressed KC crew (and Trax) will get the nod. Chiefs 23 – Ravens 21.

Green Bay Packers (+4) at Philadelphia Eagles (o/u 46.5): The NFC East champion Eagles will play host to the Pack in what should be a pretty good looking game. The Pack needed a big win over the Bears to get into the playoffs, while the Eagles pretty much got their invitation to the dance after scoring 125 points in 2 minutes against the G-men a few weeks ago. So the “mo” may be on Green Bay’s side. But the Eagles are dangerous and playing at home.

There is no question what the Packers will wear. That is white over gold. I personally think the Packers have about the third or fourth best looking road uni in the bigs, but the only qualms I have with it are the propensity of a few players to wear the super stretchies, which has the effect of shrinking their TV numbers and generally looking like crap.

The Eagles will most likely be wearing midnight green over white (although how great would it be if they could have applied to the commish to wear their kelly green 1960 NFL champs throwbacks like they did in their week one matchup with the Pack?). Despite my detestation of the Eagles, they do have some pretty nice unis, but not quite as nice as the Pack’s roadies.

Aaron Rodgers is like the fourth or fifth best QB in the game, and if you didn’t know that, you’ll find out today. Take the 4 points and the Packers. Eagles 28 – Packers 27 in a thrilling matchup.

~~~

One and one yesterday, but I feel a pair of winning picks coming on today.

~~~~~~~~~~

BCS Uni Update(s): If you weren’t already aware of it, both the Auburn Tigers and the Oregon Ducks will be wearing special uniforms for their BCS matchup tomorrow night in Glendale. Now, Oregon wearing a “different” uniform isn’t news — in fact, it’s expected. But Auburn, so steeped in tradition they’d never let UA (Under Armour, their uniform supplier) mess with that classic, right? Wrong. Auburn will have special cleats and it’s expected they’ll also be wearing special pants, with an altered stripe.

Oregon, for their part, had a special news conference back in December called by Nike, to announce their flagship team would be wearing this special uniform, which features the highlighter yellow socks and cleats. But almost from the get go, it was speculated the Duckies would ditch the white pants for something else. Well, yesterday, this promotional ad was released, showing the Ducks with gray pants and their carbon lid. Will this be what they actually trot out on the field tomorrow evening? I wouldn’t necessarily bet on it, but I wouldn’t bet against it either.

All of this, of course, is wonderful fodder for a uniform board, but it’s fast becoming Paul’s (and many of our) nightmare — how so? Well, it’s becoming the ultimate corporate bowl — literally a showdown between Team Nike and Under Armour — and don’t think the stakes aren’t high. There’s lots of merch to move, and if you for one minute don’t think both corporations don’t realize this, then you’re sorely mistaken. While this may come as news to some, we here have been aware of this impending “showdown” for some time. But even The Oregonian is catching on.

Welcome to college football 2011. It’s not the Ducks against the Tigers…it’s Nike vs. UA. In the words of John Barlow and Bobby Weir, “The future’s here, we are it…we are on our own.”

~~~~~~~~~~

That’s it for today — everyone enjoy the playoffs today and the corporate bowl tomorrow. Have a great Sunday.

~~~

I always like comments that include the words “get a life””¦ they’re usually the least ironic”¦ — John J. Sobotka

Maybe if you could make the double-stripe a little thinner so it doesn’t look so cookie-cutter NFL stripey. Kinda like the Miami (OH) helmet stripe from the Web-Domain-Company-Sponsored-By-Danica-Patrick-Bowl.

Phil, your AFC Pro Combats are excellent! My olny gripes: white shoes. I just don’t like ’em on teams that should be wearing black shoes in the models, like the Bills and DEFINITELY the Bengals.

Usually, I say that the Broncos are a white shoe team, but today’s concept to my eye says different. I think they can pull off black cleats in the orange-over-white, and the white-over-orange. The all-white is either/or.

The Jaguars are my second favorite concept after the Browns. Couple of things though: JAX is a white pants team at home IMHO. The helmet stripe is sweet, but I’m not a fan of the matte finish. I like the twin-color effext of the current helmets.

To Bowen Hobbs: those Indians tweaks are just about the coolest things I’ve seen all year (i.e. nine days ;D).

The Jeff|
January 9, 2011 at 8:08 am |

I think Phil just couldn’t draw the 2 color effect. It’s not exactly an easy thing to do. I’ve been playing around with it for the past 15 minutes and it’s really hard to make it look right.

JTH|
January 9, 2011 at 8:30 am |

You think?

At first, I was reticent to put them in black pants, but I think it actually works, since they have a black helmet (which I made flat instead of the current “two tone” thing they have going on – I like it in concept, but it’s impossible to convey on the Interwebs, so I changed it up).

The Jeff|
January 9, 2011 at 8:37 am |

Pfft, you mean I’m supposed to actually read and not just look at the pictures? I guess I need more caffeine.

DavisJedi54|
January 12, 2011 at 1:13 am |

Did the Ravens and Jaguars had to have stripes on the britches? The solid colors without stripes are the best look, epsecially with black pants.

jdreyfuss|
January 9, 2011 at 9:26 am |

I don’t like the primarily orange loops on the Bengals’ home jerseys. Make them primarily black or white with orange stripes so they stand out from the orange base. Also make the Colts facemask blue or white. White helmets and gray facemasks don’t look right together. Other than that, thumbs up for all concepts.

I was surprised that the Pro Combat mock-ups for the Bengals didn’t have tiger stripes on the undershirt sleeves. I think that the tiger stripes make Cincy’s uniforms a bit of a joke, but they’re part of the team’s identity.

You don’t need Silver anywhere on the Colts uniforms. It looked like hell when it was done before and still does. This isn’t the 1980s.

JTH|
January 9, 2011 at 8:26 am |

You’re seeing silver somewhere?

Here are the differences I spotted:

* double helmet stripe
* retro number font
* striped socks

The Jeff|
January 9, 2011 at 8:45 am |

I think he’s talking about the shoulder stripes. They’re not as bright white as the numbers, so if his monitor is set a little too dark they might look silver.

Jim Vilk|
January 9, 2011 at 1:01 pm |

“This isn’t the 1980s.”

You say that as if that’s a good thing…

Not only am I an 80s fan, I liked the Colts unis from that era. If the Colts were still in Baltimore, I’d say keep the 1958 look. But they’re in Indy, so I say throw in the silver between the stripes. Heck, bring back the blue pants from the 90s, too.

=bg=|
January 9, 2011 at 8:59 pm |

nah i loved those. loved the 80’s, too!

JTH|
January 9, 2011 at 8:20 am |

It’s been said before, but I’ll say it again.

The man’s a menace.

The only good thing about this visual disaster is the nicknames of the two teams involved, and you can’t possibly know that just by looking at the photo.

(For the record, they’re the Leathernecks and the Chanticleers.)

Jim Vilk|
January 9, 2011 at 11:38 am |

Notice it was #5…not #1. That gives me some credibility, eh?

I stuck with the FCS (1-AA) on this list. Even with 20 teams in the playoffs, I had a limited number of list-worthy matchups.

The Yankee logo tweak is not quite right — if you’re going to use the Uncle Sam hat perched on the bat, it has to have red stripes, not silver.

The White Sox tweak … as a Sox fan, I can’t day I’m a fan of these. As was said, they finally have an identity, and it’s one we like. Why change it?

The Indians concept is interesting. I like the darker red shade.

PeterT|
January 9, 2011 at 9:17 am |

Love the Yankee alternate. Great idea.
Clean, understated and traditional- harkens back to the Ruth-Gehrig era.

jdreyfuss|
January 9, 2011 at 9:24 am |

I like the Indians concepts, but leave the blue in. They’ve been red, white, and blue for almost 80 years and they’ve been a blue team throughout their entire history. The number of teams with that scheme should be reduced, but pick on a team that can’t claim it before it exploded.

That’s a little too much of a good thing. But as trim on a crisp white home and a grey roadie, I think it could really say ‘Texas’.

Brown and red. I hafta admit I never put those together in my mind until today.

Jeremiah|
January 9, 2011 at 9:39 am |

I really liked the Indians tweaks. It would be a unique look, and one they could seemingly go with for quite a while. I like that Yankees alt idea too.

johnj|
January 9, 2011 at 9:44 am |

After the NFC Pro Combat mock ups I was thinking about the AFC and I envisioned Cincy with a sublimated tiger stripe pattern, similar to the NCAA sweatbacks. I must say, I like your hybrid idea better…

… and I thank you for quoting me up there, haha defnitley put a smile on my face

Jeremiah|
January 9, 2011 at 9:47 am |

I liked these “Pro Combat” tweaks too. It’s really great work. I really like what you did with the Bills. Keeping the charging bison is a good idea. Hopefully you also found something that the Bungles can settle on aesthetically.

My only concerns are these 1.) the HOU mocks. I’d have to see it on-field, but the red-blue combo is kind of hard on the eyes. 2.) I agree with Moono in the Jags wearing white pants at home. Really, the simplest fix would be to essentially put them back in what they were wearing before this very ill-advised uni change. Thanks for doing these. I’ve really enjoyed looking at them.

LI Phil|
January 9, 2011 at 1:51 pm |

the thought behind the texans and jags was that they’re both relatively “new” teams so they don’t have decades of established football (or even real on-field success) for their unis — as such, they were the easiest to “tweak” if you will, keeping the basic elements of their uniforms while giving them their own signature look

no one wears teal over black (or teal over anything, actually) or blue over red

both would be something to maybe “have” for their own…many teams wear (color) over white, and as long as that (color) doesn’t get paired with a pair so same color pants, i’m open to teams wearing colored pants, especially if they are the same color as the helmet…granted, that’s not the case with the texans, but i wanted to meld equal parts blue and red with them, and even if the look is slightly jarring…i think they could totally own it…it’s certainly better than (imho) anything the bills, bengals or seahawks trot out there every week, and those are now, for better or worse, signature looks

thanks for the feedback…im sure i’ll make changes/alterations to these over the coming weeks and months

Jim Vilk|
January 9, 2011 at 2:51 pm |

Here’s a look the Jags could own: How about spots instead of stripes?

Well, to be effective there would still have to be stripes…but how about spotted stripes? Kinda like the Bengals’ striped stripes.

DavisJedi54|
January 12, 2011 at 1:16 am |

The Texans uni’s look great. Reminds me of my high school uniforms.

david|
January 9, 2011 at 9:57 am |

God I hope Oregon wears those uniforms with the gray pants… I’m sorry but those uniforms are awesome!

Gill|
January 9, 2011 at 10:01 am |

Why don’t the Yankee road unis have pinstripes? Are there any teams with pinstripe road unis?

Rob S|
January 9, 2011 at 11:17 am |

Several teams have done it in the recent past, but as of the 2010 season, the Colorado Rockies were the only team wearing road pinstripes.

RS Rogers|
January 9, 2011 at 6:21 pm |

Several teams have done it since before the Yankees adopted pins at home, but as of the 2010 season, the Colorado Rockies were the only team wearing road pinstripes.

There. Fixed it for you. Despite the fact that just about every uni-junkie has a deep and irrational hatred of road pins, they’re every bit as traditional in baseball as home pins.

Tim|
January 9, 2011 at 10:07 am |

Cool concept for The Tribe, but removing Chief Wahoo is less about dignity and more about the narcisistic combination of white guilt and self- righteousness. Caricatures aren’t inherently negative or devoid of respect. (Google ‘caricature logos’ and tell me if those people are disparaging themselves or promoting themselves.) Why would any professional team name themselves after something they didn’t respect? They wouldn’t.

Ricko|
January 9, 2011 at 10:29 am |

When did the standard “pro stripes” on helmets become something other than three equal width stripes?

Packers, Jets, Browns and 49ers, for example. Yes, the center white looks wider, esp. on TV, because it reflects so much light (it’s an optical illusion), but the fact is that the three are the same width…or at least originally were (not counting the occassional inadvertent separation between the center stripe and the outer ones).

In the case of Indiana or the classic Saskatchewan Roughriders, of course, the reverse is true. The two outer sripes look thicker.

—Ricko

The Jeff|
January 9, 2011 at 10:53 am |

Well, let’s see… originally the stripe width would have been determined by the center ridge on the helmet. You said yourself that there’s an illusion of the middle stripe being wider due to camera angles and light reflection, etc. So, a center stripe that appears wider… combined with some modern helmets that don’t actually have a raised center anymore… the center stripe becomes thicker by design rather than illusion.

Exactly when that first occurred is a question that will probably never be answered.

Ricko|
January 9, 2011 at 10:59 am |

I’m saying most times they ARE still equal. But the tweakers get it wrong.

Look closely the next time you’re perusing mini-helmets in a store. Three equal on all the teams I mentioned, to name a few.

True, and I knew this would start a nit picking contest.
The fact remains that the ratio is far closer to one-to-one-to-one than many people render them in their designs.

And also that, according to the “pro stripe” definiton here at UW, they are all the same width.

You are absolutlely right, however, about not knowing exactly when the outer stripes did start getting a bit thinner on the actual helmets.

My point there is that even the teams must have bought the optical illusion that the center stripe was wider.

In the case of the Gophers’ inaccuracy my first thought was, What, they looked only at old game films and a not closeup photo or two? Because if you look at the photo I posted it’s pretty tough to conclude that the maroon stripes were noticeably narrower.

Nothing new there, conceptually speaking. During the World Cup last year it was orange. Cleats in colors that don’t match team colors (other than longstanding generic black or white) seem far more acceptable in soccer than other sports…so even though it’s the NFL or Oregon in the NCAA game Monday Night it still will affect their sales numbers worldwide.

Much bigger picture than just American football here, folks.

What IS new, and is a bit disturbing, is the notion that apparently orange and neon green can be declared neutral/universal by a shoe company. See: Kobe’s kicks on…Christmas Day, was it?.

Is a high school basketball coach whose team colors are red and blue now supposed to let a player wear neon green shoes because, “But, coach, they’re neutral/universal”?

—Ricko

johnj|
January 9, 2011 at 11:24 am |

You know, I’ve never really thought of it that way. When I was growing up playing sports, the neon track spikes, cleats, wrestling shoes were always few and far between and usually worn by the better players

Now it really does seem like they’re everywhere though. Obviously the NFL has rules preventing this but its an epidemic in soccer where its actually rare to see a player in team colored (or even simple black or white) boots. Its aesthetically unfortunate.

What comforting are stories like Sir Alex Ferguson for Man U who, realizing these kooky boots should be a privelage, applied a black boot only rule to his reserves team until form improved.

…And yes, Kobe’s sneakers were that “Grinch Green” on Christmas Day, the actual colorway is much more tame and sensical:

Parent and son are shopping for new cleats/shoes for the son’s high school team.
“I want these neon green ones.”
“But, son, your team colors are maroon and gold.”
“So?”

Grrrr….

—Ricko

DanKing|
January 9, 2011 at 12:04 pm |

with soccer the bright colored cleats help you pick out teammates when looking down at the ball. doesn’t work too well when everyone is wearing the same ones, but say if there was one guy wearing green cleats he’d be real easy to pick out and pass to with a quick glance.

jdreyfuss|
January 9, 2011 at 12:05 pm |

One of my wrestling coaches (who took 2nd in the state in 1991) wore those shoes at practice every day. Because of that, I associate that colorway with “early 90s” or “half shirts,” not “elite wrestler”

Ricko|
January 9, 2011 at 12:12 pm |

“with soccer the bright colored cleats help you pick out teammates when looking down at the ball.”

Ummm…until shoemakers started farting around with shoe colors, that’s what the different colored socks were for. Stick with boots in black, white or something team-color appropriate and there’s no problem.

Still works in hockey.

—Ricko

johnj|
January 9, 2011 at 12:30 pm |

I agree Ricko… Case in point was the last world cup with those aforementioned orange/silver boots that the majority of players wore. You also see this in the various leagues whenever Nike comes out with a new colorway for the mercurial

You know what’s not a bad look? The grey cleats I noticed on Santonio Holmes last night.

DanKing|
January 9, 2011 at 2:01 pm |

Ricko, not arguing with you on that, but actually the different colored socks were for the blind refs to be able to tell who knocked the ball out.
I always kept my cleats as close to team colors as possible. Looked a lot better to me than bright pink or whatnot.

Ricko|
January 9, 2011 at 3:18 pm |

So the players gained nothing from it because the were going by the shoes and/or the color of the shorts?
(Just sayin’ that evidently the soccer coaches I’ve known must have been misinformed).

—Ricko

Ricko|
January 9, 2011 at 4:24 pm |

But, yeah, can see where it would be especially advantageous to refs.

—Ricko

jdreyfuss|
January 9, 2011 at 11:56 am |

Between the Seahawks’ use of the neon snot and Nike pushing highlighter yellow, is Nike going to replace one color wit the other as the Seahawks’ trim?

johnj|
January 9, 2011 at 12:13 pm |

i guess we’ll find out in the coming seasons… but to be honest, I think my favorite part of the seahawks uni is that neon green. Not so much for the color itself but the contrast. Excluding the all-snot-vilk-approved jersey, the neon green is somehow made subtle and appealing with its limited use…

Yes he did. Have a gander at the field camera footage and he clearly does a crotch grabbing backwards dive into the endzone. What a friggin’ signature for such a badass run. *lol*

Ricko|
January 9, 2011 at 11:31 am |

Or maybe he was just making sure the boys survived 60-some yards and seven broken/missed tackles? I mean, you could hardly blame him.

—Ricko

Ricko|
January 9, 2011 at 11:29 am |

Was gonna mention this yesterday.
One thing I admire about the Seahawks unis is that the designer didn’t opt for some oddball number font.

Instead, the numbers are the straight-ahead style seen in football for a long, long time. And large, too (a carryover from the team’s previous set), adding a healthy dose of white to brighen them up.

Say what you want, but if you showed all the NFL unis to someone who knew nothing of football but everthing about U.S. geography, topography and climate and asked, “Which team is based on Puget Sound?” the answer would be pretty obvious. In that respect, a really nice design.

—Ricko

Jeremiah|
January 9, 2011 at 11:39 am |

I would generally agree withn that. It’s not a bad design at all. It’s just poorly executed, IMO. The simple fix would be silver pants, or white if you prefer. Other than SEA’s ridiculous fixation on the monochrome I like it.

I was a Seahawks fan at their inception BECAUSE of their uniforms (hey, it’s what 8-year-olds base such preferences on), but I must say that I do like how their blue (be it a bit drab) is distinct and represents their area well. Their silver and blue days made them blend in with the likes of the Lions and the Cowboys.

They really need to ditch the monochrome for their home unis, and that hint of neon green absolutely needs to go, but the shade of blue is fine. If they came up with a lighter, kind of silvery blue for the home pants, that might be better. But going back to their old scheme is not the direction to take any revisions.

Looking good Mike! What a game. I was sporting a BFBS Hasselbeck jersey about 1600 miles from the game. lol. Hawks are now 6-2 in all blue during the playoffs. Unfortunatley, we’re 0-3 in all white and that’s most likely what we will be wearing next weekend.

Jeremiah|
January 9, 2011 at 11:40 am |

Or perhaps I should say SEA’s ridiculous fixation on two very similar shades of dark blue.

traxel|
January 9, 2011 at 11:42 am |

LI Phil takin the CHIEFS!!! Oh yeah! You definitely get the trophy over jimvilk doggin SEMO to the scrap of the 5:1. You and your Islanders are welcome to come and stay any time. We traded for rpm, you could be next.

Jim Vilk|
January 9, 2011 at 11:46 am |

The Chiefs have the best uniform in the NFL, in my opinion. Does that get me back on your good side?

traxel|
January 9, 2011 at 2:21 pm |

Got my Vanover 87 jersey on and one of the kids has on his Rison 89. You better believe we’re the best lookin. I need to see you in a Bam Morris 39 or a Dale Carter 32 before I trust your sincerity jimmyvilky! ;)

I’d wear a Succop, too.
By the way, I’d prefer his or Stenerud’s in red.

i heart bananas|
January 9, 2011 at 1:35 pm |

today is a reason i can’t watch the nfl. how can i root for a team from my hometown(balto) when the team(colts) they should be is in another city? and when you consider where they were stole the team they replaced them with(cleveland), and how i had adopted that team as my new team after moving there, it’s a cluster f*** ouroboros. and since the only thing i have found here(kc) worth getting excited about is the fact that there is zero windchill because there is never a breeze, it s hard for me to care who wins a chefs-balto game.

phil, your winner today was the texans, not bad on the ravens, and thanks for not messing with the browns. as for the colts, isn’t that a case of change for change sake stupid? i mean i hate to be “silly”, but it looks forced. and i can’t believe i am going to say this, but if you want to do something, i agree with mothervilker, maybe bring the blue pants back once or twice a year against a red team. on the other hand MV, no on the grey, that was never a good idea.

LI Phil|
January 9, 2011 at 1:59 pm |

you can’t watch the nfl because your team moved?

haven’t you yourself like, moved a half dozen times?

it’s a great point tho — your alma mater never moves, even if you do

and that’s also a great subject (for another day) to visit…are teams (like any business) just a mere entity that can (like any person in the country) move about when bad economic times, or better opportunity, arises elsewhere?

or are they more than that? are they really part of the fabric of the community, not to be *moved* at random, anymore than one could, say, move the empire state building, st. louis arch or london bridge

yo, chimp — shoot me an email and lessee if we can spin this into a uni angle…

i heart bananas|
January 9, 2011 at 3:40 pm |

i have moved 18 times(not counting within a city), and lived in 15 cities(unless i forgot one) in (almost) 41 years. let’s see if i can get the progression… balto, hoboken, hartford, balto, midland(MI), dallas, midland(MI) vienna, zurick, munich, west berlin, east blerlin, balto, detroit, akron, cowlumbus, chicago, kansas city, ???

yes, i can’t watch the nfl because my team not only moved once, but twice! i have twice been bitten by the nfl. fool me once, fool me twice kind of stuff. and when you consider one of those franchises moved to replace the other, it is a total mess. they may mean more then just an average business to a community(to some people), but have the right to move, i just don’t grove on the nfl because of it, sorry. that being said, i still kind of root for the browns and ravens(but it is forced), and i kind of have a soft spot for the packers because they are sort of a college team, and owned by the fans. but i never say to myself, oh my golly, the nfl is on, i have to watch that. today i am painting a wilbur wood, and a shane churla bobble, actually i just finished them, so i have the game on in the other room to listen too while i work.

i heart bananas|
January 9, 2011 at 3:56 pm |

oh sheeet, i forgot johnstown betwixt midland and vienna.

Ricko|
January 9, 2011 at 5:07 pm |

rpm has a valid point.

The number of people in Minnesota who still root for the Dallas Stars is so low it probably is barely measurable.

Now stir in that as much as Minnesota loved the North Stars I don’t think it’s anywhere close to the relationship the people of Baltimore had with the Colts.

And, of course, the North Stars didn’t try to slip out of town under cover of darkness, either. The Colts’ Mayflower episode really was one of the low (and unbelievably tacky) moments in franchise sports history.

—Ricko

i heart bananas|
January 9, 2011 at 6:16 pm |

i thought the peeps loved the north stars. it’s true, the colts had a real relationship with the city, they were our first pro franchise, etc. but my cousins don’t miss the coats(sic) anymore, neither does balto. from what i can tell balto holds the ravens to their bossom, and just holds the coats in contempt. i imagine if i lived there my attitude would be different, but i don’t, so i can’t get on board with the poes.

Jim Vilk|
January 9, 2011 at 8:39 pm |

There’s a shop in the Inner Harbor that sells, of course, tons of Orioles and Ravens stuff; but in the corner there’s a little section of ’58 Colts mugs and shot glasses…maybe a couple other things. I don’t know if they hold the franchise in contempt, but they certainly do when it comes to the Irsays.

I thought a simply Indians identity without Chief Wahoo would be an arrow, especially as a substitute underline flourish on the jersey.

Baltimore Ravens fans will never accept a uniform design without a “B” on it.

Anthony|
January 9, 2011 at 11:57 am |

Absolutely BEAUTIFUL, Phil. A suggestion, if I may (and I apologize if someone else has come up with this previously): I think some teams could benefit from contrast-color collars. My Texans’ current home jerseys, for example, have red collars, and I think it looks really good. It’s a nice way to add a splash of color without being too bumper-sticker-y.
Of course, with my rudimentary Photoshop skills, I’m not sure how easy or difficult that would be, but I think it would add to a handful of these designs (like the Ravens road and Broncos home).
Seriously, though: I love these. Keep up the great work!

tosaman|
January 9, 2011 at 12:02 pm |

It would be a better world if Phil’s NFL Pro Combat concepts (this week’s and last) were adopted. I can just imagine the comment chatter here if the home and road undersleeves were swapped on the field.

Be impossible to tell with the Jags’ concept, but sharp-eyed readers will light it up when the Bills show up with mismatched jerseys and undersleeves.

And that’s why this blog is on my daily must-see list.

Dave H|
January 9, 2011 at 12:05 pm |

Color-on-color already today, although none of you can see it. As usual, Michigan (in this case the women) have pulled out the maize home uniforms for a Rivalry matchup with #11 Michigan State. These schools are like UCLA and USC – it should always be color-on-color.

I suspect Michigan-Kansas men – the second half of this doubleheader – will also be color-on-color.

Jim Vilk|
January 9, 2011 at 12:05 pm |

“just to keep the one good looking element from the current uni.”

I agree the Bills’ home unis are the worst, but I like the road unis. I’d like to see a Toy Combat version of those as an alt.

The Jeff|
January 9, 2011 at 12:19 pm |

How the hell can you like the Bills road uniforms? I know you’re a bit odd, but come on. You can’t possibly have that bad of taste.

Well, yes, the all-white definitely is the best of bad lot.
Wish they’d wear the white pants at home once in awhile.
It’s that mono navy mishmash of panels here and accents there that’s really awful. Just…clunky looking.

—Ricko

Ricko|
January 9, 2011 at 12:35 pm |

A perspective few here will understand…

Living through this era of unis such as the Bills and Alouettes and Army in mono camo is a lot like waiting out the days of the Nehru jacket and the powder blue tuxedo (in this case, an eyeroll-inducing combination of both)…http://www.krakov.net/si/images/1968/0902_large.jpg

—Ricko

Jim Vilk|
January 9, 2011 at 12:22 pm |

Dude, you pretty much nailed all those Toy Combat designs! Can’t wait to see the next batch.

As for the tweakers:

Greg, great stuff, especially the red socks (sox?) on the white uni.

Bowen, I think you Sunday alts would be great for each team’s everyday uni. The only other suggestion: instead of orange and red, you might as well go orange and brown. It is Cleveland, after all.

Rocky, I like the concept of purple and black, but I still love your concept. Very nice.

“Despite my detestation of the Eagles, they used to have some pretty nice unis”

/fixed

DenverGregg|
January 9, 2011 at 12:29 pm |

Nice work on the NFL change-ups, especially the Bronx and Bills. Still not sold on the Texans, though.

The MLB mods had phenomenal craftsmanship and were definitely not run-of-the-mill concepts.

Ryan McGonigle|
January 9, 2011 at 12:34 pm |

Hey Phil, I just had a quick question. I noticed the Ducks footballers wearing their team jumpsuits with the Air Jordan logo. I know that Jordan and Nike are the same company, but could you explain why there using the Jumpman logo? Thanks Phil.

Ricko|
January 9, 2011 at 12:40 pm |

“I know that Jordan and Nike are the same company”

Might have answered your own question.

—Ricko

Kyle Allebach|
January 9, 2011 at 3:20 pm |

Yeah, but Air Jordon is associated with basketball, so why would it be on the footballers uni’s?

Ricko|
January 9, 2011 at 4:17 pm |

They think a WHOLE lot larger than that.
When the Ducks are in jumpsuits Nike/Jordan’s peddling jumpsuits.

We think no basketball playing kids watch football?

—Ricko

johnj|
January 9, 2011 at 4:32 pm |

haha thought i was gonna quell this problem… see below Ricko

johnj|
January 9, 2011 at 3:36 pm |

I think I can help out here… Jordan released special sneakers for the players as a gift for making it to the national championship. Outfitting them with sneakers and warm ups.

…and before the complaining begins, they’re player exclusive-not for sale, this is not another attempt to move product…

Oh, and since I don’t get the mothership, I get the one and only Full Court game tomorrow…Stony Brook at Binghamton. Maybe I’ll sneak a peak at the Under Armour vs. Nike game online. Go UA!

Kyle Allebach|
January 9, 2011 at 1:01 pm |

I think the Texan’s should keep their home and away uni, except for a few things;
1) White pants with red and blue home jerseys
2) Red socks with the blue pants on the away uni
3) Only wear the red jerseys for “special” occasions (big rivalry, Monday/Thursday night home games, etc.)

LI Phil|
January 9, 2011 at 1:10 pm |

well…currently, they can only wear the red 2 times a season (and once in the pre season) since they’ve designated it the “alt”…

they have chosen to wear it for “special” games, so now it, i guess, has that designation…

that’s kind of an interesting point — moose (rpm) and others with whom i’ve spoken seem to think your “best” (meaning your standard or classic, not a one-off, throwback or alt) should be worn for all your BIG games, whereas the throwbacks/alts should be worn for the “sisters of the poor” games — sure, give the fans a taste, but keep your good stuff for the important games

i used to disagree with this — like, why not break out your alt uni for a big game — but the more i think about it, the more i like the “classic” uni for all your big games

~~~

this would, of course, go against the principle of selling more merchandise…since if you’re trying to sell a replica or authentic, you’d want to wear it during your maximum exposure games

Kyle Allebach|
January 9, 2011 at 1:19 pm |

Well, I personally think that the red alt for the Texans should be used for like Monday night games, kinda like how some baseball teams only break out their different colored jerseys on a specific night. They’ll only wear it once a season at the most, so it’ll make it extra special.

Well, a bigger point is that it’s red on white, not the monochrome battle red. It’s kinda gross.

Jim Vilk|
January 9, 2011 at 2:44 pm |

Red alt with blue pants. THAT would be special.

Kyle Allebach|
January 9, 2011 at 3:10 pm |

It would, but I personally feel like its too much red/blue contrast for one day.

Been around almost as long as white pants have been around.
Certainly as long as white jerseys have been required.

Not commenting on the esthetics, just that no reason for anyone to see it as anything unusual. If we know uni history, of course.

It’s a “look”. And it’s beeen around a lonnnnnng time. A helluva lot longer than the jazzercise look the Ravens are sporting today.

—Ricko

LI Phil|
January 9, 2011 at 1:38 pm |

by “white socks” i assume you’re referring to the white undersock, not the white half-sock which is a requirement

and like the rick says, that’s been around longer than ricko has

i ONLY like the white undersock if it has a stripe pattern, and i’ll never make one with “just” a solid white look — that looks too ‘college’ (as do naked calfs)

in fact — i hate (with the exception of the ravens mock) the solid color sock with same color pant — i wish teams who wear that look now would add some stripes to break up the bicycle pant look it gives them…and teams who don’t have stripes on their pants have absolutely GOT to wear a different color sock…

look at the ravens today (or the saints yesterday) — im not sure in what circles that was ever considered a good look…

Right, the white undersock, not required half sock. I’m not saying white pants-white socks hasn’t been around forever, just saying I don’t like it. Even with a stripe pattern. I don’t particularly like the leotard effect, but I think it looks better than white-on-white (with or without stripes). But the white pants with white socks even with stripes is worse than the leotard effect, in my opinion, because it’s more of the same color overall (colored leotard sock is broken up at least by the white half socks).

Casey|
January 9, 2011 at 1:09 pm |

Is anyone else annoyed by the way the site handles “Open in new tab” commands for image links? I used to be able to control-click (or middle-mouse click) a whole series of image links, then go through them at my leisure, while reading the page as the images load. Now when I do that, it automatically focuses the new tab, forcing me to tab back and forth to read the backstory on the images, and whatnot.

I’ve realized it might just be Google Chrome, but is anyone else noticing this?

DenverGregg|
January 9, 2011 at 3:12 pm |

Never have that issue on firefox at home or on IE at work, so I think it might be a Chrome thing.

With such a great motif to work with, I am amazed that nobody can really make the Bengals’ uniforms look as good as those of the Princeton Tigers’ classics. I think it be worth a try to emulate the Jets and make the entire sleeve the alternating black and orange stripes and have the remainder of the torso a solid color.

I’d be reluctant to mess around with the Yankees’ uniforms, but I find a pinstriped away uniform appealing.

If you’re going to mess around with the Indians’ colors, why not make it like the Browns and replace the red with orange? It’s a much better combination than brown red, the Brown Bears notwithstanding.

This will be the last thing I say about the BCS game before I pack up and head down to Auburn this afternoon.

I hate that Under Armour felt the need to rush this matter as an attempt to show up Nikegon and I hate that companies like Nike and UA feel that the only way people are going to get remotely excited about a game is unveil a brand new/partially new/comic book costume-like uniform. It’s an sham, and, coming from an Auburn grad, I think it’s very unfortunate. Because I think it’s now safe to assume that Maryland will soon no longer the UA brainchild/guinea pigs of all the ‘innovation’. It’s Auburn (No offense to Maryland, but Auburn has way more recent success, a larger fan base, and more people willing to buy anything with an AU on it.) and I have a feeling this might just be the first of many ‘subtle changes’.

Secondly, UA missed a golden opportunity to set itself apart from Nike. While Oregon goes out an debuts it’s tennis ball colored socks, duck billed face masks and numbers that have neon yellow LED lights in them (because that IS seemingly the only way Oregon fans, the one’s I know at least, can get excited about a game), UA could have remained steadfast and say we’re gonna’ do what we do. Instead, we now have War Eagle across the ass. Worst-case scenerio: Next comes the tiger stripes on the pants, eagle feathers on the helmet, etc., etc. that make the Bengals look like a Pop Warner team.

To sound extremely lame and cheesy: to Auburn fans, the picture that ran at the top of the entry a few days ago is like a work of art that has remained untouched even as a couple of museums burned down around it. So don’t draw a mustache on the Mona Lisa.

As an Auburn grad, I wholeheartedly agree. This is happening mere weeks after Auburn boasted that though UA pushed them to change the uniforms they always refused. Perhaps all those new Under Armor commercials featuring Auburn came at the cost of giving them more control over the look of the unis.

Ricko|
January 9, 2011 at 3:28 pm |

A question…

Would the BCS title game be more dramatic if it were played immediately after the major bowls of Jan. 1, while interest is at its peak?

I mean, a few “filler” bowls this week (including tonight’s clash of titans, Boston College and Nevada) seem to be hurting the cause more than advancing it.

What I’m saying is…this week it doesn’t seem like Oregon-Auburn is getting nearly the buzz I thought it would.

—Ricko

gpotiger|
January 9, 2011 at 3:54 pm |

This image is from the Auburn picture session for the game. As you can see here, no new pants…won’t mean they will not wear them but not sporting them in the official team picture.http://plixi.com/p/68940648

Was about to post the same picture. Hard to type with crossed fingers. stopping noiw.

Mike D|
January 9, 2011 at 1:49 pm |

Good job to everyone on all the tweaks. As a Yankee fan, I would be against most of the (Yankee) tweaks presented by Bowen Hobbs, but they were actually done quite well.

The tertiary logo looks good, but I’d like the Yankees to continue not having a full time sleeve patch. Also, no blue alts or away caps. For the current road jersey, I agree with removing the trim from the sleeves. I would maybe remove the white trim from around the numbers and “NEW YORK” as well (not sure how that would look though). Finally, maybe give the road uniform that faux-flannel look. The throwback Sunday alt is a good idea. That’s something I wouldn’t mind seeing the Yankees do.

Many teams (I could offer up a list if we really need one) decided to go with a LOT of white when white jerseys were mandated. Some even switched TO white pants on the road. On black and white TV it made it really obvious which team was which.

That’s essentially the origin of it.

Granted, isn’t necessary so much anymore, but it just became a standard “look” for the game, especially in the pros, and as such it has lasted.

—Ricko

The Red Dog|
January 9, 2011 at 3:32 pm |

As money-grubbing as the NFL is, and as brilliant as some of their marketing is – how in the world can you not order NFL team socks for all teams through the league and/or team websites?

They would sell a ton of them.

Ricko|
January 9, 2011 at 4:13 pm |

Been asking myself that question for decades.
EastBay used to sell the solids with the white ankle…Packers, Cardinals, Raiders, Steelers, Vikings and few others…but that’s about it.

—Ricko

i heart bananas|
January 9, 2011 at 4:56 pm |

i tried that last winter, and that included the chiefs(only 2 people wanted them), but there was very little response, and i lost a good sum of cash. all i can say is i gave it the effort.

JTH|
January 9, 2011 at 11:59 pm |

I would have bought a pair.

I also would have bought SIX PAIRS of Bears’ white socks.

Ricko|
January 9, 2011 at 2:47 pm |

Good thing officials in striped shirts.
Otherwise you’d think they’d be in danger of inadvertenly getting drilled by a Chiefs downfield blocker.

Thanks to all who commented on my tweaks. I realize that anytime someone has ideas for the Yankees, they will not always be kindly received. And personally, I could live without the softball tops. The sleeve patch only appears on the alternate though.

But one of my largest pet peeves with many baseball uniforms (other than a third of the league wearing red and blue together) is the inclusion of white on the road uniform, especially on a team like the Yankees where it doesn’t add anything to the aesthetic of the uniform. In many of my baseball concepts, I have replaced white with grey (or powder blue, pastel yellow, sand, etc.) on the “away” caps. The base color for road uniforms is generally light enough to work as a sub-out for the white of the home uniform, therefore relegating the added white on most away uniforms to a superfluous white outline.

As for the Indians, I was thinking about Brown University’s color scheme when I was working on it. And while I realize Cleveland has used navy and red for the bulk of its very long existence, There are just too many teams in MLB that use blue and red. Boston, Cleveland, Minnesota, LA (AL), Atlanta, Washington, and St. Louis with navy and red. That’s seven. You also have Texas, Philadelphia, Chicago (NL), and LA (NL). Add four more. And I’m not even counting teams like the Yankees, Brewers, and Mariners, who use red in the logo set but not on the uniforms.

Bengals: Sorry, but those are fugly. The all whites are okay, but no on the others. Their current options would be acceptable if the side panel was a continuation of the pants graphic and the numeral font was different. I know you are going for an Esiason resurrection, but I don’t like ’em.

Browns: I personally like their old matte orange pants, but this isn’t bad. I would also prefer a tiny bit of white exposed in those sleeve/sock stripes.

Broncos: Much better than currents. Needs something on the shirt, kinda looks like a practice jersey. Love the orange pants. Two words: sock stripes.

Texans: Just not much to work with here. This is a team that has established nothing unique. Trend continued.

Colts: Yeah, shoulder loops are the only thing need fixing. I would have gone darker with the blue instead of lighter. It’s too light as it is. Don’t remember Burt Jones wearing that light a color.

Jaguars: Not bad. I don’t like repetitive helmet sleeve logos and sleeve stripes should be mandatory, but not bad. And I’d save the word “horrid” for something truely awful. The current sets aren’t good, but far from horrid.

In summary, appreciate the effort. I’m writing as I’m watching the Chiefs self destruct so obviously not in a good mood.

traxel|
January 9, 2011 at 3:40 pm |

….on the jags above, I meant SOCK stripes should be mandatory. Regrets for any inconveniences this error may have caused.

Pat|
January 9, 2011 at 4:38 pm |

I generally like your first half AFC tweaks. I agree Baltimore should be all black considering they are the Ravens. Should have kept the panels on the Broncos though so that the uni doesn’t look plain. I know you’ve already put a ton of time into those but what I’m curious to see would be what everyone’s current uni design would look like in the pro combat template. Of course you could move the striping down to the compression sleeves, and in the case of the Niners where they did the truncated striping because of the way that jerseys are cut these days could give them full ones. I think that’d be interesting to see.

Andrew Wagner|
January 9, 2011 at 4:40 pm |

So at this point, I think it’s safe to say we have NO CLUE what color Oregon’s pants will be. Video showing the BCS uni with the same helmet and jersey paired with BLACK pants.

If you’re suffering from “sun” depravity because of the long winter nights – I suggest watching the Michigan/Kansas basketball game – those Wolverines jerseys should do the trick.

JTH|
January 9, 2011 at 11:56 pm |

Depravity?

Jay|
January 9, 2011 at 5:12 pm |

Packers wearing the Captain’s patches…they typically do not wear them.

Is it mandatory for those to be on the uniforms for the playoffs?

JohnJ|
January 9, 2011 at 5:20 pm |

Don’t think so… jets never wear them and didnt last night

The Red Dog|
January 9, 2011 at 6:43 pm |

No – Patriots have never worn them.

Kyle Allebach|
January 9, 2011 at 6:11 pm |

I just noticed, but do the Eagles never wear captians patches?

i heart bananas|
January 9, 2011 at 6:34 pm |

i was looking for something else, but came across this. it sort of refers to our discussions yesterday, andi love this striping pattern, my all time favourite.

traxel|
January 9, 2011 at 9:18 pm |

Wasn’t in on the discussion yesterday…but looking at those sleeves, do you see the 49ers sleeves as having the same striping pattern as the Packers? Well, I should say, have you always portrayed in your mind as them being the same or the niners as having simply three white stripes?

I so despise the look of the Nike helmets and uni structure that I struggle to view any of these fondly, but even that aside I really don’t think any of these–save the Bills, which have nowhere to go but up–are really an improvement. Texans are particularly egregious with blue over red.

The helmet stripes on the Jags and Ravens seem really off. What have you against helmets without stripes?